| 查看: 4301 | 回复: 32 | |||
| 当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖，点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖 | |||
liaoyanguo铜虫 (正式写手)
|
[交流]
本人认为审稿人的意见完全是错误的 已有30人参与
|
||
|
本人在Journal of Materials Science上投了一篇文章，发回了拒稿意见。本人认为审稿人的意见完全是错误的，如果依据他的说话，很多专家和学者做了很多错误的工作。有大量的高档次文献为证。该怎么给编辑写信了？审稿人没有考虑系数β在特殊情况下可近似认为是一个常数，而全盘否认我的工作。 这是审稿人的意见： The authors invetigate by nanoindentation the mechanical responses of different elastic-plastic film-substrate combinations using FEM. The elastic modulus measurement relies on the well known Sneddon relationship which must be written with a correction coefficient β as (see literature) That the authors write in a different manner with a coefficient c* in the following form To determine the elastic modulus the authors choose a constant value for c* (or β) proposed by Dao. The big issue of this choice is that the correction coefficient β is not a constant parameter but depends on penetration depth, E/σy ratio and strain hardening exponent n, as recently demonstrated by Abbes et al., J. Micromech. Microeng. 20 (2010) 065003. This very important paper put in questions many of the previously published papers. Consequently, the content of the present paper is completely wrong and cannot be published. Tha authors can verify themselves, since they made FEM, that for each penetration depth the value of β to satisfy the relationship must take different values when the penetration is varied and also when the mechanical properties of the sample are varied. 请各位专家和兄弟提供意见!谢谢！ |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
上海工程技术大学 激光智能制造课题组 2027级博士研究生招生
已经有5人回复
-
课题组招2027级博士 上海工程技术大学 激光智能制造方向
已经有5人回复
-
有机合成以后会不会被AI改变？做科研的虫友怎么看
已经有8人回复
-
求合成方法
已经有7人回复
-
现代”学阀”该如何界定
已经有12人回复
-
我的奶奶
已经有3人回复
visitor958
至尊木虫 (文坛精英)
IEEE杂志与会议专家
- 应助: 2283 (讲师)
- 贵宾: 0.05
- 金币: 17310.5
- 散金: 2544
- 红花: 76
- 帖子: 15735
- 在线: 2926.6小时
- 虫号: 489254
- 注册: 2008-01-01
- 专业: IEEE
10楼2010-09-11 23:20:19
stone1239528
木虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 19 (小学生)
- 金币: 3445.7
- 红花: 2
- 帖子: 835
- 在线: 418.3小时
- 虫号: 784432
- 注册: 2009-06-01
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 通信理论与系统
2楼2010-09-11 18:55:04
3楼2010-09-11 19:07:50
4楼2010-09-11 21:02:34